You called my people cowards on a nightly basis for years based on your skewed perception of events in World War II and your willingness to please the Bush administration before and during the Iraq war. [Read Jay’s Anti-French material]

While it is a fact our leadership betrayed us and surrendered us to the enemy in 1940, over 100 000 men in uniform died trying to slow the German advance. Had the French been the cowards you so often joked about, there would have been no battle of Lille and no evacuation of 340 000 British troops from Dunkirk. But historical facts were never your forte.

One last time Jay, let me remind you your mocking of the events of 1940 was – and is – as offensive to the French as 9/11 jokes are to Americans. In a print interview, you also went as far as calling the French Resistance a “mythical joke”, a highly offensive and revisionist comment you have yet to redress.

We will not miss you, save a sincere apology.
Marc from Miquelon.org

More from 112 Gripes About The French. Published in Paris in 1945 by the ‘Information & Education Division’ of the US Occupation Forces.

The French fought in Africa, in Sicily, liberated Corsica, fought in Italy, took part in the invasion of Europe and fought through the battles of France and Germany — from Normandy to Munich.

Units from the French navy participated in the invasions of Sicily, Italy, Normandy and South France.

Units of the French navy and merchant marine took part in convoying operations on the Atlantic and Murmansk routes.

On June 5, 1944, the day before D-Day, over 5,000 Frenchmen of the resistance dynamited railroads in more than 500 strategic places.

They delayed strategic German troop movements for an average of 48 hours, according to our military experts. Those 48 hours were tactically priceless ; they saved an untold number of American lives.

French resistance groups blew up a series of bridges in southern France and delayed one of the Wehrmacht’s crack units (Das Reich Panzer Division) for twelve days in getting from Bordeaux to Normandy.

About 30,000 FF1 troups supported the Third Army’s VIII Corps in Brittany: they seized and held key spogs ; they conducted extensive guerrilla operations behind the German lines.

25,000 FFI troops protected the south flank of the Third Army in its daring dash across France: the FFI wiped out German bridgeheads north of the Loire River ; they guarded vital lines of communication; they wiped out pockets of German resistance; they held many towns and cities under orders from our commmand.

When our Third Army was approachiung the area between Dijon and Troyes from the west, and while the Seventh Army was approaching this sector from the South, it was the FFI who stubbornly blocked the Germans from making a stand and prevented a mass retirement of German troops.

In Paris, as our armies drew close, several hundred thousand French men and women rose up against the Germans. 50,000 armed men of the resistance fought and beat the Nazi garrison, and occupied the main buildings and administrative offices of Paris.

118 Responses to “Adieu Jay”

It is a well worn myth embraced by many ignorant Americans that the French forces folded quickly and without bloodshed. Actually the defeat was caused by failures of the General staff and the surpise tactics of the German blitzkrieg. Ihe British Expeditionary Forces were also defeated but through German hesitation and attacks by French and some isolated British units kept pressure on the other German units. Notably, De Gaulle distinguished himself in attacks that blunted German armor. The war would have been much different if his opinions on tactics and organization had held sway in the General Staff before the war.
France was our first ally and I hope that our interests will always be close enough that we will always ne allies. Vive La France!

There was never anything even remotely humorous in these “jokes”. Leno should have kept his humor to making “fun” of American targets. Nobody deserves these insults. Would he find insults thrown at Americans about 9/11 or Vietnam funny? I don’t think so.

Americans have NO business making these insults. If we didn’t have the Atlantic and Pacific, with high tech and well armed opposition such as Japan and Germany on our borders, how well would we have done with virtually no tanks, minimal weaponrey, and limited air power. We would have been overrun faster than we were in the Philipines. Remember, 1940 was not 1944 or 45 and we were minimal at best.

Thank you Poilu, you’ve made the point of how awarkward it is to joke about the dead of an Ally. The US, Canada, France, Australia, New Zeeland and the UK are historical brothers in the struggle to preserve liberty, equality and fraternity. To this end, we have added Japan, the EU memberstates South Korea, India and others are comming. The least honorable thing that Allies can do is to insult and belittle those who were before us and with us in this struggle of preservation. An insult against one is a direct insult against all.

If we had the Japanese and Germans on our border during 1930’s – 40’s, we would have armed ourselves in a wink of an eye and built up an owesome military (which we did later after we got involved in WW2) It was precisely because we were protected by the Altantic Ocean which meant that Germany could not invade nor bomb us from an ocean away that we were so defenseless.

Whoa, look at all the Bushitters! You might consider moving with him to Waco and form a court-in-exile, like Napoléon in Saint Helena. Then you’ll be able to remember the good old days, when the United States acted like jerks and set off on pointless half-assed “wars” (if you can call razing undevelopped countries with shitty militaries a “war”) and pissing your neighbors off.

The Iraq war saw the use of the new top-secret “bunker buster” bombs. The US High Command was right to assume that a 400-pound American dropped from the sky was sure to smash through anything in his path.

@Andre, that “undevelopped countries with shitty militaries” invaded two of its neighbors ( Kuwait & Iran) , not to mention gassed the Kurds.
Iraq had a “shitty military”? Then French weapons must be “shitty” since Germany and France were Saddam’s biggest weapons suppliers. France also had no problem helping a brutal dictator like Saddam build nuclear reactors . German helped Saddam build chemical factories capable of dual use. When Saddam gassed the Kurds he used French planes and German chemicals to do the job.

PS1: I didn’t support the Iraq war but it is too much to hear German & French hypocritical moralizing lectures about Iraq when those two countries have their dirty fingerprints all over Saddam’s Iraq .

PS2: It is not “undeveloped” but ‘underdeveloped countries’. Also I think most Iraqis would find this term rude and offensive. Since this is a website devoted to figting offensive remarks about France, one should practise what they preach.

PS3: Those who suffered under Saddam haven’t forgotten who Saddam’s best friends were even if the French and Germans have. The following is an article written by a Kurd in response to German lectures about human rights in Iraq.

I must admit that I was astonished when I recently read in the newspaper that a German parliamentary delegation was visiting Iraqi Kurdistan and that the head of the delegation, Herta Däubler-Gmelin, had made critical remarks about the situation of human rights in the region.

As someone who survived the Iraqi army’s poison gas attack on Halabja, I may be permitted to make some comments on Ms. Däubler-Gmelin’s visit.

If Ms. Däubler-Gmelin had had her way, Saddam would still be sitting safe and sound in one of his palaces in Baghdad and no changes would have been possible in this country.

And after 2003, it was people like her – and so many others in Europe – that showed no concern for the changes and developments underway in Iraq. We did not have the impression that the terror unleashed by Al-Qaeda upon the people of Iraq gave them any sleepless nights either. On the contrary, for years they seemed to welcome the suffering of the Iraqis as proof that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein had been a mistake.

How can you claim the right to criticize our present situation without saying anything about our past?

WE HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN THAT GERMANY HELPED SADDAM HUSSEIN TO BUILD THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS THAT WERE USED AGAINST US IN HALABJA

For many years now, Kurdish organizations have been demanding that GERMANY AT LEAST OFFER AN OFFICIAL APOLOGY FOR THIS CRIME. No such apology has been forthcoming.

Our politicians ought then to insist that such visitors pay their respects to all the victims of the poison gas attacks on Halabja, Balisan, Goptapa, Saussanan and elsewhere, to all the persons who went missing during the Iraqi army’s Anfal campaign, to all those who were tortured and killed by Saddam. Instead they allow someone like Ms. Däubler-Gmelin to come to our country without making her first stop at Halabja.

I am convinced that if Ms. Däubler-Gmelin had travelled to Israel under similar circumstances, she would have been required to visit Yad Vashem. Only after commemorating the victims and the German crime against them would she have been allowed to express her criticisms.

I would like therefore to say to the people of Iraqi Kurdistan that the

COMMENTS OF MS.DAUBLER-GMELIN SHOULD NOT BE REGARDED AS CRITICISM BUT RATHER AS ONE LAST DOSE OF POISON.

administered by people who evidently have still not come to terms with the new situation in Iraq.

Both American French-bashers and French American-bashers are idiots, no matter your purpose. I don’t care if the French Bashers started it, you’re just as bad. Why sink to their level? Don’t give me those cheesy excuses like “thats the only way to fight them”. You should knock it off, it doesn’t matter who started it as long as you are doing the same thing you are just as bad. Not to mention alienating.

This will become nothing more than a bunch of unintelligent xenophobic comments on both sides of the aisles. Look what the French-bashers reduced you too! congratulations.

What is this about France being Iraqs’ main supplier? The US bought half of the Iraq oil, Italy was next and France was tied for third. Armmaments were old Soviet and East European as almost all French made aircraft was still grounded in Iran from the first Gulf War. Iraq had more US weapondry than French! Check out Janes from 2000.
Jane, I truely see and appreciate your point. I never want to US bash or bash any Ally (sometimes I am tempted by the Brits), but, how do you get unreasonable people to listen to discussion if they are denied the privledge of empathy through recognition of what hateful language brings. All in all, though, I’m with you and would rather take the ethical route.

@ Poilu
Actuall you may want to brush up on who supplied Saddam with the most chemical weapons ( see below from Wiki : Germany 52%, France 21%).

Over 73% of Iraq’s chemical weapons program was from France & Germany. The remaing 27 % of Saddam’s chemical weapons contributed by mainly 4 countries – UK, Italy, Brazil and USA sold some dual use capacity to Saddam’s Iraq which breaks up to single digit percentage figure for each of these countries.

So please pare us the hypocritical moralizing sermons on Bush’s Iraq war when France and German have the biggest dirty fingerprints on Saddam’s Iraq, a fact well know by Saddam’s victims such as that article written by the Kurd clearly shows.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
In the early 1970s, Saddam Hussein ordered the creation of a clandestine nuclear weapons program.[15] Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs were assisted by a wide variety of firms and governments in the 1970s and 1980s.[16][17][18][19][20] As part of Project 922, German firms such as Karl Kobe helped build Iraqi chemical weapons facilities such as laboratories, bunkers, an administrative building, and first production buildings in the early 1980s under the cover of a pesticide plant. Other German firms sent 1,027 tons of precursors of mustard gas, sarin, tabun, and tear gasses in all. This work allowed Iraq to produce 150 tons of mustard agent and 60 tons of Tabun in 1983 and 1984 respectively, continuing throughout the decade. Five other German firms supplied equipment to manufacture botulin toxin and mycotoxin for germ warfare. In 1988, German engineers presented centrifuge data that helped Iraq expand its nuclear weapons program. Laboratory equipment and other information was provided, involving many German engineers.

ALL TOLD 52% OF IRAQ’S INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WEAPON EQUIPMENT WAS OF GERMAN ORIGIN.

State Establishment for Pesticide Production (SEPP) ordered culture media and incubators from Germany’s Water Engineering Trading.[21]
France built Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in the late 1970s. Israel claimed that Iraq was getting close to building nuclear weapons, and successfully destroyed the reactors in 1981. Later, a French company built a turnkey factory which helped make nuclear fuel. France also provided glass-lined reactors, tanks, vessels, and columns used for the production of chemical weapons.

AROUND 21% OF IRAQ’S INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WEAPON EQUIPMENT WAS OF FRENCH.

@ Poilu
Actuall you may want to brush up on who supplied Saddam with the most chemical weapons ( see below from Wiki : Germany 52%, France 21%).

Over 73% of Iraq’s chemical weapons program was from France & Germany. The remaing 27 % of Saddam’s chemical weapons contributed by mainly 4 countries – UK, Italy, Brazil and USA sold some dual use capacity to Saddam’s Iraq which breaks up to single digit percentage figure for each of these countries.

So please pare us the hypocritical moralizing sermons on Bush’s Iraq war when France and German have the biggest dirty fingerprints on Saddam’s Iraq, a fact well know by Saddam’s victims such as that article written by the Kurd clearly shows.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
In the early 1970s, Saddam Hussein ordered the creation of a clandestine nuclear weapons program.[15] Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs were assisted by a wide variety of firms and governments in the 1970s and 1980s.[16][17][18][19][20] As part of Project 922, German firms such as Karl Kobe helped build Iraqi chemical weapons facilities such as laboratories, bunkers, an administrative building, and first production buildings in the early 1980s under the cover of a pesticide plant. Other German firms sent 1,027 tons of precursors of mustard gas, sarin, tabun, and tear gasses in all. This work allowed Iraq to produce 150 tons of mustard agent and 60 tons of Tabun in 1983 and 1984 respectively, continuing throughout the decade. Five other German firms supplied equipment to manufacture botulin toxin and mycotoxin for germ warfare. In 1988, German engineers presented centrifuge data that helped Iraq expand its nuclear weapons program. Laboratory equipment and other information was provided, involving many German engineers.

ALL TOLD 52% OF IRAQ’S INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WEAPON EQUIPMENT WAS OF GERMAN ORIGIN.

State Establishment for Pesticide Production (SEPP) ordered culture media and incubators from Germany’s Water Engineering Trading.[21]
France built Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in the late 1970s. Israel claimed that Iraq was getting close to building nuclear weapons, and successfully destroyed the reactors in 1981. Later, a French company built a turnkey factory which helped make nuclear fuel. France also provided glass-lined reactors, tanks, vessels, and columns used for the production of chemical weapons.

AROUND 21% OF IRAQ’S INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WEAPON EQUIPMENT WAS OF FRENCH.

Nick, You refer to German supplies delivered in the early ’80s when the US was buying the oil AND paying for Iraq to be aggressive towards Iran. The French sales could have just as easily been used to process milk or legitimate chemicals. I have no argument that the French knew where material was going, but nobody thought, back then, that Iraq would use weapons on their own people. Nobody includes the US, Soviets, France, Germany, Italy, or the UK. It’s the old “unintended consequences” routine that we have all seen, many times, including reciently in Iraq. I would prefer that governments did not make mistakes but, unfortunately, all do and they have throughout history.

@ Fred
You may need to believe for emotional reasons that French sales were used for milk and other legitmate needs even though there is no proof. Prehaps you also need to believe that French built nuclear reactor at Osirak was for harmless purposes, and also the French built turnkey factory which helped make nuclear fuel was also for harmless purposes.

It takes an amazing capacity for denial to believe what you have written considering Saddam’s well know reputation as brutal strongman with stragetic ambitions way back in the 1980’s. Fortunately the Israelis were not so naive and destroyed the nuclear reactor in1981.

Regarding US being Iraq’s oil importer. True but what you failed to note was that this was under the UN oil for food program. The money was used to buy food for Iraqi’s under an UN program.

“The United States remains the largest importer of Iraqi oil under the UN Oil-for-Food program. However, U.S. companies can no longer deal directly with Iraq for its oil imports. U.S. companies are forced to deal with third party vendors as a result of a ban on all American companies imposed by Iraq. In 2002, the U.S. imported $3.5 billion worth of Iraqi oil.In addition American oil companies have not signed a contract with Baghad since 1972.”

France & Germany had much deeper extensive business ties with Saddam’s Iraq.

“France’s largest oil company, Total Fina Elf, has negotiated extensive oil contracts to develop the Majnoon and Nahr Umar oil fields in southern Iraq. Both the Majnoon and Nahr Umar fields are estimated to contain as much as 25 percent of the country’s oil reserves. The two fields purportedly contain an estimated 26 billion barrels of oil.In 2002, the non-war price per barrel of oil was $25. Based on that average these two fields have the potential to provide a gross return near $650 billion. ”

“More objections have been lodged against French export contracts with Iraq than any other exporting country under the oil-for-food program, according to a report published by the London Times. In addition French companies have signed contracts with Iraq worth more than $150 million that are suspected of being linked to its military operations. Some of the goods offered by French companies to Iraq, detailed by UN documents, include refrigerated trucks that can be used as storage facilities and mobile laboratories for biological weapons. ”

“From 1981 to 2001, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), France was responsible for over 13 percent of Iraq’s arms imports”

This is pure arms import, does not include chemical & nuclear capabilities.

,Nick, I won’t go over the nuclear issue. I agree with you that Iraq was too volitile to aid in building a nuclear plant, but, I will tell you that France barely outbid Italy and if France had not built the plant, Italy or the Sovietw would have. The French also built the Israeli nuclear arm and I’m not sure that was such a good idea either.
As to the “oil deals”, please read them (Don’t know if they’re on line), I think that you will discover that France had put in so many restrictions that the work couldn’t begin until and unless the UN Security Councel (With US veto possible) authorized Iraq to be released from its’ international repreations and obligations. Besides, the participants to be utilized in the development of these prospective fields were US, UK, Dutch, French and Itallian. French interests in this joint venture was as a minor partner. I confess to you that the only reason that I know anything about this is that I live in the heartland of petroleum lawyers and some of them were involved from the American oil company position. Sorry, again, but I doubt that any of these are on line.

I agree with you somewhat. All western countries naively did business with Saddam’s Iraq. Oil being such a valued commodity it was only natural.

But some countries had very deep commercial ties with Saddam’s Iraq. while other countries had minimal business ties with Saddam. Germany by far had the most extensive ties with Saddam and German businessmen continued to have a lucrative relationship with Saddam’s Iraq even after he gasssed the kurds, and invasion of Kuwait & Iran.

“German officials are investigating a German corporation accused of illegally channeling weapons to Iraq via Jordan. The equipment in question is used for boring the barrels of large cannons and is allegedly intended for Saddam Hussein’s Al Fao Supercannon project.An article in the German daily Tageszeitung reported that of the more than 80 German companies that have done business with Baghdad since around 1975 and have continued to do so up until 2001, many have supplied whole systems or components for weapons of mass destruction.”

Germany’s hand are the dirtiest out of all the countries. 52% of Iraq’s chemical weapons came from Germany (which the Kurds haven’t forgotten even if Germans have conveniently done so).

Today Germany has the same deep extensive commerical ties with Iran, In fact out of all the European countries, German firms have the largest business relationship with Iran. What is it with German firms and Arab dictatorships? They seem to get along very well.

Nick- our choice of source – Heritage – is really quite telling. A Neo-Con organization if there ever was one, they’re only slightly less ridiculous than Fox in their anti-French obsessions, even though many of their culomnists (if one can call them that) also contribute to Fox. It basically fits the pattern of all American Conservative spittle: US interests GOOD, French interests BAD – essentially playground logic.

To be taken with a huge grain of salt.

Another ORIGINAL and UNRECYCLED joke from poilu:

Q – When jetliners crash into tall buildings, what sounds do they make?A – BOING!! (B-O-E-I-N-G)

Nick, investigation, with consequences and corrections are paramount! We all see mistakes and greed makes fools of us all. The whole point of looking into these past actions is to work, together, to do and be better in the future. Although noone wants misdeads to go unnoticed nor unconfronted, I really do not feel that entire Nations are guilty for what a few do nor what a government unwittingly allows – wether American, French or German. The only governments with absolute control are NOT democracies. I would rather live in a democracy any day.

@ Poilu,
Prehaps you may want to point out if there was anything infactual in the link from Heritage before bashing it. This article in Heritage used sources such as the German daily Tageszeitung, the London Times , Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). These are hardly rightwing neo con institutions.

Prehaps you may want to be careful about throwing around that neo con label every time you come across unpleasant facts. Let me see, anybody who mentions the fact that France built Saddam’s nuclear reactor is a “neocon” ? I think you have displayed your mindset very clearly.

PS: Your jokes are getting a bit original but still no zing. Need to be more witty.

Again I agree with you. One has to learn from the past so that we can avoid it going forward. There are lessons for all but some countries who were the biggest suppliers to Saddam have to learn from their mistakes. There are always going to be crooked businessmen and countries such as Germany have to have more laws on the books to prevent their firms from getting around loopholes to do business with dictators despite UN sanctions. The German parliament needs to have more oversight over German firm’s business ties with dictatorships such as Iran etc. Germany having an export driven economy is quite behind in this matter as exports are given top prority , damn the consequences.

Nick – I don’t have to throw the “Neo-Con” label around when the Heritage Foundation does it so well themselves. A simple search of words “french” and “france” is proof enough for me that they are no friends of ours. What the Heritage wants, on the world policy front, are “yes” men. Anything less is an obvious threat to American interests. I believe this proves my earlier point on national interests. The Heritage may be a view, but it hardly encompasses anything more than a far right wing opinion self grandeur and execptionalism, both of which are almost dead.

Nick, I have read some good, seemingly accurate, items from the Heritage Foundation and I have read some pretty idiotic statements. Like all of these “think tanks”, Heritage has a spread of journalistic ethics. Rhey are probably the best, in their category, but they are definetly leaning well to the right politically. Being so, Heritage is just as open to suspecion as those Foundations to the left. Poilu is simply stating the obvious – Always question your source and their motives.

But the point is the German & EU courts are not doing anything to resolve it. And it looks suspciously like the same mistakes are being made with German business ties to Iran.

mean time, not allowing the truth about who exactly was Saddam’s biggest WMD suppliers allows people to spew half truths, distortions and misinformation in order to smear the USA as the main culprit. Case in point, Poilus remarks above (#21) : “Nick – you may want to brush up on who supplied Iraq with the chemicals needed to conduct the Al-Anfal program, starting with DOW chemicals.” And he gives a link which only talks about US sales thereby giving the misleading impression that it was the USA which was responsible for Saddam’s WMD. One must give the whole picture, not a tiny portion of the picture to suit one’s biases as what Poilu did by only talkin about US sales. When one looks at the whole picture it appears that Germany & France supplied Saddam with 73% of chemical weapons capability.

Nick, Now your making a point! I am rather supprised that these issues were/are not being addressed. We may hear clarification, but, I would imagine that we need someone familiar with the German Courts to give us insight. I know that their Courts are natoriously slow (as they are in the US) but this does need to be addressed. I know that the French delt with this issue years ago and the American system has identified transgressers but, to date, I know of no action. See, you can make a valid point. Now let us talk about the poor quality water purification and electrical equipment that US contractors sold to the US for use in Iraq.

I always question what I read anywhere whether leftwing or rightwing. Like you I find that it is possible to find idiotic and accurate articles on both sides. In general I find the NewYork times & Economist to be the most accurate, though they sometimes make mistakes too. This particular article from Heritage is well sourced – reputable organisations such as Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), UN documents, the German daily Tageszeitung & the London Times . These are hardly rightwing loony types.

On the other hand there are some articles from Heritage that I would never quote. It all depends on the quality of the journalist writing that particular article.

Also wanted to mention that Poilu’s sources such as “hartford” are also biased and not exactly known to be the top tier of journalistic intergrity.

Nick, OK, we agree. The question remains, is Germany doing nothing? We need to identify where they are, and why. I’m with you in that I certainly do not want Iran to be nuclear. Also, once we know, where do we go from there. This is not a blog designed to address German issues. We need to be listening to good Germans, who care about their country, and let them know your concerns. I’ll even join you, if you want.

Ah, Jay Leno… I still remember the first first French-bashing joke I ever heard from him – making fun of the French military of course – while substantiating his “joke” with a picture of a French Legionnaire, of all soldiers.

@ Fred
How can anything be done when most Germans are not even aware that their country supplied Saddam with 52% of Saddam’s chemical weapons capability?

It wasn’t the German media but foreign media outlets which broke the story on Germany’s deep commercial ties to Saddam. It was the NewYork times that first broke the story during the first Persian gulf war ( kuwait) of how Germany companies were the biggest chemical weapons suppliers to Saddam far outstripping other countries. This issue is not even in the public conscience, hence there will be no public pressure on the Bundestag to act . And besides when other people ( French and some Americans ) keep pointing the finger at the US as being the main culprit thorough selective reporting, it is not going to get better.

And now it appears German companies are doing brisk business with another middle east dictator in Iran.

@Fred
I read enough German media outlets and their comments section to know that most Germans are not aware. The same old tired story of pointing the finger at the USA as the biggest culprit is repeated, the facts be damned. If anyone points out the fact that it was Germany which sold Saddam 52% of chemical weapon capability, cries of “German bashing” will follow. Sound familiar?

I don’t like French-bashing, American-bashing or even German bashing. The point is that you have concerns, which may be very valid, about German control of their trade. If you are saying that the Germans that you have communicated with are indifferent, that is disturbing. Self-criticism is a necessary step in all democracies. I think that maybe you should approach this differently. Germans are very intelligent and are well aware of their troubled past. They respond to diplomatic concern with a touch of appealing to their sense of justice. With patience, I know that you will reach the right people. I do congratulate you for trying.

But thats just it, pointing out facts is not “bashing”.
It is rather unfortunate that sometimes when unplesant facts about a particular country is noted, than cries of “bashing” will follow.

I think we should be aware that it is only half truths, selective reporting and distortions with the clear aim to smear is actually bashing. Giving the whole picture and pointing out facts is not bashing.

I don’t blame the Germans but their media for downplaying & minimizing their country’s deep commercial ties to Saddam’s weapons program. Likewise the same now, the German media rarely talks about German firm’s extensive business ties to Iran .

And besides with the economic downturn, it is doubtful they will do anything , their export driven economy needs exports at all cost, the consequences be damned. Besides Germany paid no price internationally for being Saddam’s biggest chemical weapons suppliers. So, they have nothing to fear.

Nick, you make a good point on bashing. I really do believe that people want to respond to diplomatic concern and immediately reject, violently sometimes, bashing of ones’ Nation. Instead of questioning who or why, maybe it would be a better intro to just state “is it true and what is Germany going to do about it, if it is”.

Nick, Additionally, you might go back and contact those writers whose writing brought this to your attention. You may well find someone who would want to redig into the issue and they may have contacts in Germany that can get you somewhere. Please do have your German-English Dictionary handy.

@Nick
“I don’t blame the Germans but their media for downplaying & minimizing their country’s deep commercial ties to Saddam’s weapons program. Likewise the same now, the German media rarely talks about German firm’s extensive business ties to Iran . ”

I don’ think you read German papers. I do read them, and I can remember quite well that this topic was widely covered by many German newspapers. I still remember cruel cartoons in Die Zeit about the “Deutsches Giftgas AG”. And as far as Iran is concerned, commercial ties between German (and French) companies and Iran have nothing to do with weapons, contrary to what you are suggesting. True: Germany and France sold weapons to Saddam among others because he was at war with Iran and was widely viewed between 79 and 90 as a rempart against islamist Iran, but the US supplied chemical waepons too for the same reason. Donald Rumsfeld paid a visit to Saddam as an envoy from Reagan and told him that he had nothing to fear from the US if he should use chemical weapons (as he did against Kurds and against Iranians).

I did not say the German media did not cover it. I said they minized and downplayed Germany’s immense and and largest contribution to Saddam’s WMD arsenal. Sure they covered it AFTER foreign media outlets such as the NewYork times gave it wide coverage .

The German media tends to by and large make it sound as if Germany’s contribution to Saddam’s WMD was no better or worse than USA sales when the facts show Germany’s immense 52% contribution to Saddam’s WMD arsenal was by far the biggest and far outstripped USA single digit figure. Most Germans are not even aware that Germany contributed 52% – if you can provide links to German media showing this high percentage than I will stand happily corrected.

Germany = 52%
France = 21%
UK, Italy, Brazil, USA = 27%

As the figures above show, some countries had deep extensive commercial ties to Saddam’s Iraq while other countries such as UK, Italy, Brazil & USA had minimal business to ties to Saddam. To put these countries in the same category as Germany is absurd but that is exactly what the German media tends to do in regards to USA.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

As for your claim that Germany only sold weapons to Saddam during the Iran war, than you must have missed this in the Tageszeitung . In fact the New York times and other newspapers have written on how German companies continued to sell WMD capability to Saddam AFTER the Iran war.

“German officials are investigating a German corporation accused of illegally channeling weapons to Iraq via Jordan. The equipment in question is used for boring the barrels of large cannons and is allegedly intended for Saddam Hussein’s Al Fao Supercannon project.An article in the German daily Tageszeitung reported that of the more than 80 German companies that have done business with Baghdad since around 1975 and have continued to do so up until 2001, many have supplied whole systems or components for weapons of mass destruction.”

As for your claim about Rumsfeld they are absurd and again an attempt to smear the USA through false allegations. This is what is called “bashing”. But if you have some credible source verifying this story I wll be open but until than I prefer to stick with facts, facts such as Chirac visited Saddam several times in order to sell nuclear technology and other weapons to Saddam. How come Germans know so much about Rumsfeld’s ONE trip to Saddam but not so much about Chirac numerous trips to Saddam?

In French we have a proverb. It says : The worst deaf is the one who doesn’t want to hear. Rumsfeld made TWO trips to Saddam. Check the article in “The Guardian”. Of course you would not find it in the “heritage Foundation”.
There is no German newspaper simply called the “Tageszeitung”, you must have missed the first half of the name.

I don’t dispute Rumsfeld made two trips, what I find objectionable is your false accusations about what Rumsfeld told Saddam. Likewise you wouldn’t find anything about Chirac’s numerous visits s to saddam in the Guardian.

I believe Andre has already answered you about “Tageszeitung”. That is a German newspaper but then again you already knew that .

PS Sorry for missing the accent on your name Andre, don’t have French keyboard : )

I checked the facts. Chirac paid only ONE (two week) visit to Bagdad in november 1974, when he was PM. Saddam Hussein came to France the year after and stayed 2 weeks too, Chirac being still PM. Maybe Chirac made private visits after he quitted, but I don’t think so. When he became PM in 1986-88, he never flied back to Iraq. The “numerous visits” made by Chirac exist only in your imagination. French PM Raymond Barre went three times to Iraq, but no French president ever did. This is a chronology in Frenchhttp://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/monde/chronologie_496841.html

Here are some interesting news items about Chirac’s relationship with Saddam, such a close relationship between a western leader and a brutal dictator like Saddam was rather strange to say the leaset.

"Judicial Watch, Inc. (hereinafter, “Judicial Watch”) is a non-profit, non-partisan, public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption and abuse.

"Based on our preliminary investigation, as well as recent press reports, there is sufficient evidence to implicate senior French political and governmental officials including, but not limited to, Mr. Jacques Chirac. These unlawful activities involve private persons, corporations and government officials from: France, Iraq, the Peoples’

Mr. Chirac has engaged in a decades-long illicit campaign to violate and subvert international law, European Union (E.U.) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) conventions, as well as U.N. resolutions and sanctions. According to recent press reports, as well as the 1991 book, The Death Lobby; How the West Armed Iraq , by Kenneth R. Timmerman, and the 1992 book, Notre Allie Saddam by French journalists Claude Angeli and Stephanie Mesnier, Mr. Chirac has been engaged in a nearly thirty (30) year conspiratorial relationship with the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein – trafficking in arms, military equipment and nuclear technology. Over the last thirty years Mr. Chirac has facilitated, both in and out of government office, the sale and/or transfer to Iraq of:

In return for supplying Saddam Hussein with arms and nuclear technology, Mr. Chirac and others have personally benefited through financial support for their political party(ies) and campaigns.[2] French corporate and governmental corruption was well documented in mid-March 2003, by New York Times columnist William Safire, whose work (cited at length below) details the unlawful sale and fraudulent trans-shipment of Chinese rocket fuel to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq via Syria. Mr. Safire has published the contents of e-mails from a French firm that knowingly brokered and facilitated the criminal act. Mr. Chirac, when confronted by the media concerning the details of the transaction, lied and claimed it had not occurred."

"NRO: How close was the relationship between Saddam and Chirac? K enneth Timmerman, a New York Times best-selling author, lived and worked as an investigative reporter in France for 18 years

Timmerman: Like lips and teeth. One of my favorite stories is the bullfight Chirac hosted for Saddam in the southern France resort town les Baux-de-Provence in September 1975, where Saddam bet $600,000 on the bulls. During that first trip Saddam made to France, Chirac stuck to him like glue . He also arranged to sell Saddam a nuclear-research reactor, which Saddam himself called a nuclear-bomb plant."

Why censor what I wrote about Chirac and Rumsfeld?
This information can be easily found in the Wiki and Judical watch which is a liberal organization.
OK, I get it you can’t stand the facts but making false accusations about Rumsfeld and be extension USA, is ok?
I guess the standard for your blog is : Lies about USA = okay.
Truth about France = not okay and must be censored right away
To censor Wiki and Judical watch? That tells us all we need to know about your blog. I think word will get around very fast that you censor Wiki when it is not to your liking.

If you have not already, check out this (new) video game for Wii. I was going buy it, but when I saw that they retained and further ridiculed it’s easiest contender, Glass Joe, (French), I decided against getting this game. It’s really immature that they kept this character and emphasized his “Frenchness” (i.e. weak and easy to beat up).
Terrible!

Nick the article you quote doesn’t content “facts”, but judgements of value. When you write “Mr. Chirac has been engaged in a nearly thirty (30) year conspiratorial relationship with the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein” this is not exactly what i will call a “fact”. By the way there is nothing “unlawful” in trading with Iraq. You may find morally objectionable of course, but it is not illegal. And don’t forget that Iraq had signed the NPT. There is no “conspiracy”, it is only business and (shortseeing) Realpolitik.
Now I found out that Chirac made actually a second private trip to Bagdad, with Raymond Barre (who was then PM) on his way back from India in 1976. But two visits are not “numerous”. And Saddam made also a first official visit in France in 1972, he was received by President Pompidou. He came twice to France. You may see the TV-films of Saddam’s arrival in 72 and 75 at the Elysée Palace on internet.

What does Chirac’s supposed close ties with Saddam have to do with Jay Leno and his show leaving its current time slot ?

“”OK, I get it you can’t stand the facts but making false accusations about Rumsfeld and be extension USA, is ok?
I guess the standard for your blog is : Lies about USA = okay.
Truth about France = not okay and must be censored right away””

Miquelon is being extremely polite by letting you hijack this thread with your “facts” on his anti French-bashing blog of all places.
If you get my drift…
So at least show some respect.

Kenneth Timmerman is a yellow journalist who is a registered republican as well as a former candidate for the US Senate from Maryland. In fact he is listed here on Miquelon.org as a notorious French Basher and was the focus of an editorial in 2004. Oh and his website looks like shite.

This thread was already hijacked when someone made a remark about Rumsfeld’s meeting with Saddam which has nothing to do with this topic.
Strange you didn’t notice the “hijacking” when it was Rumsfeld……if you catch my drift.

Still waiting for an apology over censoring my posts on what Wiki says about Rumsfelld’s meeting with Saddam. On last count , censored 3 times, but never mind it has already been read by millions of people in Wiki. The truth always gets out no matter how hard people try to create myths.

I have only come across one Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam, he may have visited Iraq more than once but he certainly didn’t meet Saddam twice.

Also as for your claim that Rumsfeld gave Saddam the green light to use chemical weapons, the Wiki says the opposite, that according to declassified state department records of his meetings in Iraq, Rumsfeld communicated the USA’s unease over use of chemical weapons and made it clear that it “inhibited” US efforts to help Iraq in its war with Iran.

I am sure Fred would be delighted with this research which is readily available in Wiki to combat bashers (in this case bashers of USA).

Oh boy! I just wrote a beautiful narative and I forgot to put down my address and it was erased.
Summary: 1. I watched Bush when he was governor of Texas and I knew that he was going to be a disaster. He hates government and wanted it to be broke, minimal and ineffective.
2. Rumsfeld was a tool of Cheney and the neo-cons. They were far too interested in Empire and cared less about the rest of us.
3. The Republicans have a lot of very talented and smart people, but, they are crushed by the far right. For ten years the Party has been getting smaller and smaller. We (the Republican Party) needs to change and be more than a white, regional party.
4. Don’t worry about bashing of Rumsfeld. For his warpped idea of running a war, he should be bashed.

I thought you were very keen on correcting misinformation based on your post #64 . So naturally I am now surprised you are not so keen when misinformation about US policy is corrected. It is a very serious nefarious propaganda to smear the US by saying it gave the green light to Saddam to use chemical weapons when the facts show as Wiki noted the opposite was true.

So, I am trying to get this straight.
Correcting misinformation about France = important
Correcting misinformation about USA = Not important ?

Nick, Sorry, my addressed issue was Rumsfeld himself. I am not qualified to address his visits to Iraq under the pre 2002 regime. I am simply disgusted with what the man and the Bush Administration put an understaffed and underarmed military go through and his utter contempt for the military of all non-english speaking militaries. There is no doubt that what visits Rumsfeld did make to Iraq were not of his interests but for the purpose of doing the bidding of the White House under Reagan and the first Bush. He was a different man back then, or so it seems.

My post was about Rumsfeld’s visit to Iraq during the Reagan years and I have given the Wiki link for it so it would make anyone who read my posts (with the link for Wiki) qualified to answer the question of whether there was misinformation spread about the US giving the green light to Saddam to use chemical weapons. If you choose to avoid this issue, fine but at least you should have the same standards of praise for correcting misinformation about the USA as you do for correcting misinformation about France.

There was in nothing in my posts about Rumsfeld in the Bush administration so don’t know why you are answering my posts with issues I did not raise.

The issue I addressed was very specific, someone here made an assertion that the US gave the green light to Saddam to use chemical weapons. I answered with the link from Wiki which clearly showed that was incorrect. So based on your posts praising others for correcting misinformation about France, naturally I am puzzled why you don’t have the same praise for correcting misinformation about USA.

This issue got nothing to do with Rumsfeld in the Bush adminstration, so let me ask you again.

Nick,
I am certain of what I read, but I must make investigations to check the facts and find the source (I think a theatre play was performed in London on this topic, a direct performance of the official report). Short after Rumsfeld’s first visit to Bagdad, the US State departement issued a declaration condemning the use of chemical weapons by Saddam. On Rumsfeld’s second visit Saddam expressed concern about this. And Rumsfeld told him that he had nothing to fear from the president. When asked about this in 2004 he told journalists that he did not remember.

This thread was already hijacked when someone made a remark about Rumsfeld’s meeting with Saddam which has nothing to do with this topic.
Strange you didn’t notice the “hijacking” when it was Rumsfeld……if you catch my drift.

How stupid do we think we are ? Since page 2, there’s 8 pages worth of your “facts” about Saddam and the French.
And besides, Nick, you are lying. You’re the first one who brought up Saddam for some reason.
Post #10
10Nick Says:May 16th, 2009 at 3:56 amSo Jay is evil now? But not Saddam.

Now could you please go back to freerepublic, no pasaran, drudge or whatever ultra right wing blog you came crawling out of ?
Thanx.

Let me get this straight, bringing up saddam is a big no no.
But bringing up Bush is okay? Strange you didn’t notice the “hijacking” of the thread when Bush was mentioned …if you catch my drift.

According to your fundamentalist mindset, bringing up Bush, Iraq war, US weapons sales to Saddam, Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam are all fine and dandy but no one should ever ever mention French weapons sales to Saddam, Chirac’s long term relationship with Saddam starting in the 1970’s etc. And if anybody dares to do so they will met with name calling and insults. In other words you want a one sided view to suit your biases.

@Jean paul
You make serious allegations based on what you saw on the theatre?

As I mentioned once before I can only find one case of Rumsfeld meeting Saddam personally. So, I will presume this so called second meeting with Saddam was all in the imagination of the theatre production.

According to your fundamentalist mindset, bringing up Bush, Iraq war, US weapons sales to Saddam, Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam are all fine and dandy but no one should ever ever mention French weapons sales to Saddam……

Stop trolling. You’re the one who first mentioned Saddam, completely out of the blue on a thread dedicated to the Jay Leno show.
And as a well trained troll, you have successfully managed to steer the conversation, originally denouncing Jay Leno’s French-bashing, toward denouncing supposed French misdeeds….for 9 pages. Congrats, mission accomplished.

On a blog dedicated to fighting French-bashing. A complete coincidence of course since I’m sure French-bashing is an issue you care deeply about…if you catch my further drift.

You once again avoided the issue…what second meeting with Saddam?
How could there have been a literal transcription of Saddam’s second meeting with Rumsfeld when there was NO second meeting?

Rumsfeld had one meeting with Saddam and the declassified statement department records as noted by Wiki indicate Rumsfeld voiced the US disapproval of Saddam’s use of chemical weapons . I have provided the Wiki link for this already.

@ Jean paul
By the way, I saw a play which was about Chirac’s meeting with Saddam where Chirac told Saddam it was okay to use chemical weapons. It was a literal transcription of archives in the french foreign ministry. So sorry I can’t provide any proof and I have forgotten the name of the play now.

I really can’t imagine even Rusmsfled advocating the use of chemical weapons. I know that Iraq was under extreme stress in its’ war with Iran. After all, Iraq was often outnumbered on the battlefield ten to one! If better equipment wasn’t enough, I can see a lot of people, who knew better, looking the other way. There really is no need for bashing on anyone as everyone seems to have looked the other way. I also believe that, today, Western Governments know better than to “trust” a dictator. Just how long they go before they conviently “forget”, I don’t know.

@mike
I am no Rumsfeld fan and think he is an arrogant bastard but I object to misinformation and especially about such a serious matter as giving the green light to use chemical weapons.

@Fred,
The USA did not look away but voiced its disapproval to Saddam about his use of chemical weapons during the war with Iran. I have already posted the link from Wiki for this. Since the USA had very minimal business ties with Saddam’s Iraq it felt no need to stay silent as other countries which had very deep commercial ties with Saddam’s Iraq did. Like I mentioned before, to put countries like UK, Italy, Brazil and USA which had minimal commercial ties with Saddam in the same category as Germany and France which combined together gave over 73% of Saddam’s WMD capability is absurd. I have already given the link from Wiki for these figures. And Germany’s contribution to Saddam’s arsenal was far more substantial than France , however the Germans show no indication of changing their laws to prevent German companies from arming ruthless dictators again.

Nick, Well, I’ve been going all over the net for hours and hours, over days and I must conclude that there is so much “stuff” going both ways. It’s a lot like the WIKI on April Glaspire – every which way but loose. Also, do you know who is behind “globalsecurity.org”? They throw out alot of information that I wonder how they verified their “facts”. Anyway, Nick, I do appreciate the focus that you have brought forth. Hard to believe, but, I think a lot of “facts” may have vanished or got redefined. This is going to take a reporter with a ton of time and patience to weigh through. Nick, I volunteer you to stir up someone at the Economist or NYT. You might also check out an Iraqi news reporter for one of their new, independent papers. They would probably be interested in researching the local records.

I have a feeling when the facts are not to your liking, you will dismiss them. It is not only Wiki but the New York times and other major newspapers, and and also even some German & French media that have reported on Germany and France’s deep commercial ties with Saddam’s Iraq . They can’t ALL be wrong. But if you need to believe they are all wrong for your emotional health, be my guest.

Nick, I am rather offended by your #97 reply. Here I am, being polite and supportive, and you attack my assertion that I am reading conflicting messages on the Net. If you are going to attack everyone that seeks to support your point, you will be very lonely indeed.

Reagan sent Rumsfeld to salute saddam during the Iraq/Iran war….just to ask him to not use chimical weapons??????

So he is a hero!? Why did he wait this meeting to be made public by the media instead of trying to hide it?

In the same serie, Chirac met Saddam in the 70s in order to ask him to not be a dicator.
And Rumsfeld was on the board of a company providing nuclear technology to North Korea in order to send them fake data so they explode themselves….

Alan was the first to air a one hour radio show on French Bashing in 2003. He invited me and Christopher Ruddy of Newsmax. I am surprised he would use such imagery, but at the same time the commercial is supposed to be over the top and plays with anti-left prejudice…

At the same time, that Disney WB character was designed to stereotype the French in the post-war era. Sent Alan a twitter…

I thought that these lies over our supposed arms supply to Saddam were over, I guess some still have the donkey style, “têtu comme un mulet” ; no averred news-papers would dare to print them today, just a few biased idiots showmen that want to make laugh an audience, or biased colomnists… umm, I got quite a few of them brooched through my sword

[[Let me see, does pointing out well know facts reported in the media for years that the French helped Saddam build nuclear reactors qualify as “french bashing”. When did the truth become “bashing”? ]]

According to your fundamentalist mindset, bringing up Bush, Iraq war, US weapons sales to Saddam, Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam are all fine and dandy but no one should ever ever mention French weapons sales to Saddam, Chirac’s long term relationship with Saddam starting in the 1970’s etc. And if anybody dares to do so they will met with name calling and insults. In other words you want a one sided view to suit your biases.

Heard concerning that site from my friend. He aimed me right here and informed me I’d locate which I necessity. He was appropriate! I got all the concerns I had, answered. Didn’t also take extended to locate it. Really like the simple fact that you produced it so straightforward for individuals prefer me. Much more supremacy

Leave a Reply

Featured

About Miquelon.org

Miquelon.org is a watchdog group dedicated to documenting Anti-French activity in news and entertainment industries in the United-States, Canada and other countries of the Anglosphere of influence. We monitor Anti-French activity, French Bashing, Francophobia and related issues.